
![]() |

The fastest way to a man's heart is between the third and fourth rib.
Actually, this is a populer misunderstanding. you see, if you go by way of the ribs, then you have the ribs in the way, doing exactly what they're supposed to do: protect the heart (yes, I realise they also hold up all the flesh and create a chest cavity for the lungs and diaphagm, but i'm being simple here). however, if you go by way of just under the ribs in an upward motion, it's all fleshy tissue, which is much easier to get through then ribs without special tools. therefore, the fastest way to a man's heart is actually through his stomach, in an upwards direction. longer distance, easier path.
...I just realized I spend way too long thinking about all the wrong things.

![]() |

David Fryer wrote:The fastest way to a man's heart is between the third and fourth rib.Actually, this is a populer misunderstanding. you see, if you go by way of the ribs, then you have the ribs in the way, doing exactly what they're supposed to do: protect the heart (yes, I realise they also hold up all the flesh and create a chest cavity for the lungs and diaphagm, but i'm being simple here). however, if you go by way of just under the ribs in an upward motion, it's all fleshy tissue, which is much easier to get through then ribs without special tools. therefore, the fastest way to a man's heart is actually through his stomach, in an upwards direction. longer distance, easier path.
...I just realized I spend way too long thinking about all the wrong things.
No thats why you turn the blade Horizontal so that the ribs don't black a thing. Just make sure you have a blood grove or they are darn hard to take out.

![]() |

kessukoofah wrote:No thats why you turn the blade Horizontal so that the ribs don't black a thing. Just make sure you have a blood grove or they are darn hard to take out.David Fryer wrote:The fastest way to a man's heart is between the third and fourth rib.Actually, this is a populer misunderstanding. you see, if you go by way of the ribs, then you have the ribs in the way, doing exactly what they're supposed to do: protect the heart (yes, I realise they also hold up all the flesh and create a chest cavity for the lungs and diaphagm, but i'm being simple here). however, if you go by way of just under the ribs in an upward motion, it's all fleshy tissue, which is much easier to get through then ribs without special tools. therefore, the fastest way to a man's heart is actually through his stomach, in an upwards direction. longer distance, easier path.
...I just realized I spend way too long thinking about all the wrong things.
OH! see, I thought you wanted to remove the heart. and was using your hand. your extremely...sharp...hand...ya. that made no sense. I know. if you just want to get at it and leave it there then ya. ignore my previous post.

![]() |

The Eldritch Mr. Shiny wrote:Cool, but I always heard the ending as, "Teach a man to fish, and he'll sit in a boat all day, drinking beer.""Give a man a fish, and he'll fish for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he'll fish for a lifetime."
- James Danforth "Dan" Quayle
Best Quayle misquote, however, is:
"What a waste it is to lose one's mind, and not to have a mind is being very wasteful. How true that is."
Close runner-up:
"It has been proven that... a good defense cannot, uh, beat... a better offense. In that case the good offense wins."

![]() |

I stitch in time saves nine, or ten, even elven and twelve. But never thirteen, bacause that's just bad luck.
See, I never really understood that. If time has stitches, then doesn't that mean that something broke it? and that's a bad thing? also, would time naturally heal itself if we just stitch it togeter, or is it just as temporary as ducttape? which would mean that the next major super-villain giant crab person (since the first time time broke, we evolved to form giant crab people, of course) can just rupture it again easily...
Also, how would time having stitches save anything? especially something specific like "9"? 9 whats? is it actually a prophesy that stitching up time will lead to the salvation of a small group of humans who can then repopulate the newly fixed timestream?
I smell adventure seed! A prophesy so ridiculous sounding it has become common household advice!

![]() |

"I divide my officers into four classes; the clever, the lazy, the industrious, and the stupid. Each officer possesses at least two of these qualities. Those who are clever and industrious are fitted for the highest staff appointments. Use can be made of those who are stupid and lazy. The man who is clever and lazy however is for the very highest command; he has the temperament and nerves to deal with all situations. But whoever is stupid and industrious is a menace and must be removed immediately!"
German General Kurt von Hammerstein-Equord

![]() |

BluePigeon wrote:I stitch in time saves nine, or ten, even elven and twelve. But never thirteen, bacause that's just bad luck.See, I never really understood that. If time has stitches, then doesn't that mean that something broke it? and that's a bad thing? also, would time naturally heal itself if we just stitch it togeter, or is it just as temporary as ducttape? which would mean that the next major super-villain giant crab person (since the first time time broke, we evolved to form giant crab people, of course) can just rupture it again easily...
Also, how would time having stitches save anything? especially something specific like "9"? 9 whats? is it actually a prophesy that stitching up time will lead to the salvation of a small group of humans who can then repopulate the newly fixed timestream?
I smell adventure seed! A prophesy so ridiculous sounding it has become common household advice!
It's a saying that mending things when it only requires one stitch (the stitch in time, as in "in time to prevent disaster", not a stitch in time itself) saves nine stitches later when the little hole you could have fixed with one stitch has taken half your trousers away and now needs nine times the amount of work to fix.
EDIT: Apologies for adding mind to the mindless thread.

![]() |

It's a saying that mending things when it only requires one stitch (the stitch in time, as in "in time to prevent disaster", not a stitch in time itself) saves nine stitches later when the little hole you could have fixed with one stitch has taken half your trousers away and now needs nine times the amount of work to fix.
A sietch in time saves water.

![]() |

Paul Watson wrote:It's a saying that mending things when it only requires one stitch (the stitch in time, as in "in time to prevent disaster", not a stitch in time itself) saves nine stitches later when the little hole you could have fixed with one stitch has taken half your trousers away and now needs nine times the amount of work to fix.A sietch in time saves water.
HA! Dune Joke! Awesome! you just don't see enough of those...

![]() |

It's a saying that mending things when it only requires one stitch (the stitch in time, as in "in time to prevent disaster", not a stitch in time itself) saves nine stitches later when the little hole you could have fixed with one stitch has taken half your trousers away and now needs nine times the amount of work to fix.
EDIT: Apologies for adding mind to the mindless thread.
I actually did know that. I was attempting to be humourous, but clearly I failed at it. It's just interesting how odd some phrases seem when either taken out of context, taken literally, or when they become so used that they don't even apply anymore to the original situations. like stitching pants. i don't know very many people that even repair their pants anymore. evetryone wants ripped clothes and some even buy theirs pre-ripped.
or how about "an arm and a leg"? comes to mean expensive, but without knowing that how would you interpret that statement? I would see that as actually costing an arm and a leg, possibly in a bartar system or something being dangerous or valuable, that you would risk said appendages for it.
anyhow. this is me, spending way to much time not thinking about the work i should be doing...

![]() |

The Eldritch Mr. Shiny wrote:HA! Dune Joke! Awesome! you just don't see enough of those...Paul Watson wrote:It's a saying that mending things when it only requires one stitch (the stitch in time, as in "in time to prevent disaster", not a stitch in time itself) saves nine stitches later when the little hole you could have fixed with one stitch has taken half your trousers away and now needs nine times the amount of work to fix.A sietch in time saves water.
I read too much QC and play too much KoL.

![]() |

A penny saved is ridiculous. Show me a man who has found a dollar walking down the street, and I'll show you a man who spends too much time looking at his shoes.
Doc - "You know what they say: People in glass houses sink sh... sh... sh... ships."
Rocco - "I got to buy you like a proverb book or something, because this mix 'n' match shit's gotta go."Doc - "What?"
Connor - "Well, a penny saved is worth two in the bush, isn't it?"
Murphy - "And don't cross the road if you can't get out of the kitchen."

![]() |

Just want to add a real saying at doesn't make sense: Cheap at half the price.
[rant]Of course it would be cheap at half the price! I mean, it's half price. Compared to full price, that would be cheap. The only way this would be sensible is if the original value is way over the top, which is not how the saying is used. And even then, it would only be 'reasonable at half the price'. Now, 'cheap at TWICE the price' would make sense but...[/rant]
Ok. I'm calm now. And QC is a non-sequiter quote dreamfest.

![]() |

Just want to add a real saying at doesn't make sense: Cheap at half the price.
[rant]Of course it would be cheap at half the price! I mean, it's half price. Compared to full price, that would be cheap. The only way this would be sensible is if the original value is way over the top, which is not how the saying is used. And even then, it would only be 'reasonable at half the price'. Now, 'cheap at TWICE the price' would make sense but...[/rant]
Ok. I'm calm now. And QC is a non-sequiter quote dreamfest.
What about new and improved? How can something be both new and improved at the same time? We mericans are really lazy when it comes to language.

![]() |

kessukoofah wrote:I read too much QC and play too much KoL.The Eldritch Mr. Shiny wrote:HA! Dune Joke! Awesome! you just don't see enough of those...Paul Watson wrote:It's a saying that mending things when it only requires one stitch (the stitch in time, as in "in time to prevent disaster", not a stitch in time itself) saves nine stitches later when the little hole you could have fixed with one stitch has taken half your trousers away and now needs nine times the amount of work to fix.A sietch in time saves water.
hmm...i'm almost done the Something Positive archives again...maybe I'll go back and read QC for the fourth time...

Biggus |
Just want to add a real saying at doesn't make sense: Cheap at half the price.
[rant]Of course it would be cheap at half the price! I mean, it's half price. Compared to full price, that would be cheap. The only way this would be sensible is if the original value is way over the top, which is not how the saying is used. And even then, it would only be 'reasonable at half the price'. Now, 'cheap at TWICE the price' would make sense but...[/rant]
Ok. I'm calm now. And QC is a non-sequiter quote dreamfest.
(laughs) The only person I've ever heard say "cheap at half the price" was my grandad, I always thought he made it up (he was full of silly stuff like that, I still miss it). After years of hearing him say it, I saw an old TV advert (1920s - 1940s era IIRC) which advertised something as "cheap at twice the price", so I guess people reversed it to take the p!$$.
EDIT: A quick Googling has turned up that some people do use it to mean "expensive", which I think is what my grandad meant by it (if he meant anything and wasn't just being daft for the fun of it). Do the people who you know use it to mean "cheap"?